Actually, the difference between background/foreground processes is mostly
overblown.  First, you can set adjust the relative priority.  Second, if
you're not using your server as a desktop system, then foreground processes
are pretty minimal.

A couple of years ago, there were instructions floating around the Net on
how to convert your Winnt Workstation to a Winnt Server.  It was mostly a
few adjustments in the registry; the two operating systems were otherwise
identical.  Microsoft took steps to stop this with Win2k, but, except for
the 10-connection limit, Win2k Pro would be just fine as a server for most
purposes, including IMail.

We run IMail on a Win2k Server, but I am under the impression that there are
people on this list who run large IMail installations on Win2k Pro.  So this
shouldn't be a problem for technical reasons, but, of course, the EULA is a
different matter.

Ben Bednarz
BC Web


----- Original Message -----
From: "Todd Holt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 1:36 PM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Win XP


> EULAs aside, Win2k Server should have better IMail performance than Win2k
> Pro b/c the server version gives a priority benefit to background
processes
> (ie: Services) and the Pro/Desktop version gives a priority benefit to
> foreground processes (ie: XL, Graphics).  This goes way back into the
> history of NT3.x and goes to the heart of what the two products were meant
> to do.
>
> I still would not go with XP just because its the new in thing.  In fact,
I
> would not go with it specifically because its the new in thing.  Its not
> tested enough yet in a high performance business environment.  I don't
know
> of any major corps that have adopted XP yet.  My opinion is to wait and
see
> what the XP-SP1 fixes.
>
> Todd
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert Haskett
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 2:26 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Win XP
>
>
> >>1)Windows XP is a desktop OS....IMail is a mail server....hence the OS
> named
> >>Windows 2000 Server...enough said..
>
> The arrogance of that statement is unbelievable. I quote from the Ipswitch
> webpage "IMail Server is an easy-to-use,  web-enabled, secure and
> spam-resistant mail server for Windows NT/2000/XP." I don't see the word
> SERVER there anywhere.
>
> I still think the jury is still out on whether or not running Imail on
WinXP
> or Win2K Pro is a violation of the EULA. I have read through the EULA and
I
> don't agree that it is a violation. Using XP or 2000 Pro to run Imail in
my
> opinion is drastically different that having someone "login or signon" to
> the server to use print or file services. I have read all the propaganda
on
> here on a number of threads so don't everybody start flaming me. Just
> offering my opinion to the above ludicrous statement.
>
> I run Imail on Win 2K Server JUST so that the M$ police don't ever come
> knock down my door. Just to be safe. Billy Gates has spies everywhere.
>
> >>2)with that volume the XP will probably croak ......quickly..
>
> And your proof of this statement is? 3000 users is NOT a huge load on an
> Imail server. There are Imail servers out there running alot more than
that.
>
> Now with all that said, run Imail on a Win 2K Server (even though it runs
> FINE on Win 2K Professional or NT 4.0). Just don't enable IIS services and
> avoid all the security crap that IIS brings with it.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Maurice
> Lovelady
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 1:14 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Win XP
>
>
> Acouple of points to make here:
>
> 1)Windows XP is a desktop OS....IMail is a mail server....hence the OS
named
> Windows 2000 Server...enough said..
> 2)with that volume the XP will probably croak ......quickly..
> 3)As someone else pointed out you be in direct violation of your EULA to
run
> XP Pro as a server even if it would accept all those simultaneous
> connections
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ben Granholm
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 9:05 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Win XP
>
>
> Is anyone out there running Imail 7.x on Win XP Pro? We are going
> upgrading our server and we are seeing if it makes any sense to get 2000
> server over win xp pro. All we will run on it is the mail server and we
> have the unlimited license with approximately 3000 addresses. We see a
> decent volume of mail in our peek times. Can any of you give me any
> advice?
>
> Ben Granholm
> MAP Internet, Inc.
>
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
> An Archive of this list is available at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
>
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
> An Archive of this list is available at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
>
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
> An Archive of this list is available at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
> An Archive of this list is available at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
>


Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html 
to be removed from this list.

An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/

Reply via email to